If Canon makes a full-frame mirrorless camera, should they forego some of the potential size benefits to maintain full EF-mount compatibility? And just how compatible would it be?
More than ever, rumors are circulating that Canon and Nikon are finally going to take mirrorless seriously by building full-frame mirrorless cameras. These rumors, which may well turn out to be nonsense, all seem to suggest that these cameras will be built around the companies´ respective DSLR mounts.
It´s an interesting quandary: develop a new, space-efficient mount or stick with your existing system?
I´m going to argue that the right answer is much clearer for a manufacturer than for the end consumer. And I think I can guess which option we´re likely to see.
Supporting your legacy
The benefits of supporting your legacy mount seem obvious: the manufacturer gets to keep selling their existing lenses and the consumer ends up with a huge range of lenses to choose from. Surely there´s no conflict there?
The advantage of all (or most) of an existing system´s lenses being compatible from day one seem overwhelming. Plenty of choice, the ability to sell mirrorless cameras to existing lens owners and no reputational damage. Everybody wins, right?
`There`s a risk of building a system that prioritizes backward compatibility over maximizing performance`
The problem with building a mirrorless camera with a full-depth mount goes deeper (pun intended) than all of your mirrorless models being bigger than necessary. That said, even people who prefer larger cameras are usually referring to grip depth and spacing of controls, rather than demanding their camera has a big box of fresh air in the middle of it, for no functional reason.
A question of focus
No, the bigger issue is that most DSLR lenses aren´t designed for mirrorless. I´m not just talking about some designs being larger than necessary, I´m talking about the use of focus motors that are great for DSLR phase detectio ...
|
